Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Animal (2023 film)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Draftify. It may become notable, but isn't yet, with many of the Keeps lacking policy. It can be improved until it meets N:FILM Star Mississippi 12:28, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Animal (2023 film)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Animal (2023 film) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NFF. Also, WP:TOOSOON. Needs to be deleted or moved to DRAFT until release. DonaldD23 talk to me 17:28, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What makes the production itself notable? When principal photography has been covered by multiple WP:RS? It has. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 12:25, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So 4 are not. :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 12:45, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Well sourced, and can have more sources added. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify : All Reference film announcement, Shooting start and release date but the film's production is not completed. ‪AShiv1212‬ (talk) 21:06, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Where does it say shooting must be complete for a film to have its own article? Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:41, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Notability (films)#Future films, incomplete films, and undistributed films : Similarly, films produced in the past which were either not completed or not distributed should not have their own articles, unless their failure was notable per the guidelines AShiv1212 (talk) 07:42, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please read "films produced in the past". This is not a film produced in the past. It is currently filming. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 07:45, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - per Krimuk. Shahid • Talk2me 10:54, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - per nomination, filming already started and going on, few leaks from set as well and most important not every Indian film is shot at Pataudi Palace. C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 06:24, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting and, as stated, just because a film has started shooting doesn't guarantee that the filming will be completed, the film will be released and be considered notable.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:19, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unless WP:NFF is explicitly changed to say that no film should have an article unless it is released, we shouldn't be deleting articles for films that are currently filming. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:34, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's not at all what I was saying. I didn't say that "no film should have an article unless it is released", I meant that starting to film a movie doesn't guarantee that there should be an article on a movie. Liz Read! Talk! 07:39, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, but this one has adequate referencing at this point to warrant an article. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 08:02, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:19, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - This upcoming Indian movie should have gone for the notability. And also, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS.
CastJared (talk) 19:43, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Meets the necessary criteria to justify an article. -- StarryNightSky11 ☎ 22:30, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Like Miller's Girl, I don't see that NFILM's criteria for films in production is met: Additionally, films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines. I'm relisting to see if there is more support for Draftication.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:07, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Does not appear notable, news coverage seems speculative. Delte as per WP:CRYSTAL, doesn't seem to me meet WP:GNG. CT55555(talk) 03:09, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify; normally I'm not a huge fan of draftify as it's often a half-hearted way to delete in 6 months, but it's totally appropriate for an up-coming film. We are not the news, we are not a PR site, we have all the time in the world. There is no hurry. If the film turns out as big as is promised, there will be no problem in moving the draft to main-space as soon as it's ready. For the moment, the only films that should get into main-space before they've even appeared are those where there has been some mega-issue meaning that they've got a lot of independent coverage pre-release. This would normally be films with a huge scandal attached to their production, or a massive news-story involving some of the main people involved. Routinely-being-produced films shouldn't be in main-space merely because someone's leaked some information about them (if nothing else, it just encourages PR people to leak). Elemimele (talk) 12:05, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Animal_(2023_film)&oldid=1141512986"